Math Is Fun Forum
  Discussion about math, puzzles, games and fun.   Useful symbols: ÷ × ½ √ ∞ ≠ ≤ ≥ ≈ ⇒ ± ∈ Δ θ ∴ ∑ ∫ • π ƒ -¹ ² ³ °

Login

Username

Password

Not registered yet?

#151 2013-10-30 07:27:26

bobbym
Administrator

Online

Re: Correspondence Chess

1. e4 c5
2. d3 d6


In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it.
All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof.
 

#152 2013-10-30 07:42:23

anonimnystefy
Real Member

Offline

Re: Correspondence Chess

1. e4 c5
2. d3 d6
3. Nd2


The limit operator is just an excuse for doing something you know you can't.
“It's the subject that nobody knows anything about that we can all talk about!” ― Richard Feynman
“Taking a new step, uttering a new word, is what people fear most.” ― Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Crime and Punishment
 

#153 2013-10-30 07:46:58

bobbym
Administrator

Online

Re: Correspondence Chess

1. e4 c5
2. d3 d6
3. Nd2 g6


In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it.
All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof.
 

#154 2013-10-30 08:16:47

anonimnystefy
Real Member

Offline

Re: Correspondence Chess

1. e4 c5
2. d3 d6
3. Nd2 g6
4. g3


The limit operator is just an excuse for doing something you know you can't.
“It's the subject that nobody knows anything about that we can all talk about!” ― Richard Feynman
“Taking a new step, uttering a new word, is what people fear most.” ― Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Crime and Punishment
 

#155 2013-10-30 09:22:31

bobbym
Administrator

Online

Re: Correspondence Chess

1. e4 c5
2. d3 d6
3. Nd2 g6
4. g3 Bg7


In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it.
All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof.
 

#156 2013-10-30 18:43:51

Agnishom
Real Member
Award: Wink Sherlock

Online

Re: Correspondence Chess

bobbym wrote:

I used a board and pieces just like everyone else.

What is the computer way?


'And fun? If maths is fun, then getting a tooth extraction is fun. A viral infection is fun. Rabies shots are fun.'
'God exists because Mathematics is consistent, and the devil exists because we cannot prove it'
'Who are you to judge everything?' -Alokananda
 

#157 2013-10-30 19:45:27

bobbym
Administrator

Online

Re: Correspondence Chess

It uses a tree and alpha beta pruning.


In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it.
All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof.
 

#158 2013-10-30 19:52:49

Agnishom
Real Member
Award: Wink Sherlock

Online

Re: Correspondence Chess

I meant is there a way to render the board on the computer rather than the real board and pieces?


'And fun? If maths is fun, then getting a tooth extraction is fun. A viral infection is fun. Rabies shots are fun.'
'God exists because Mathematics is consistent, and the devil exists because we cannot prove it'
'Who are you to judge everything?' -Alokananda
 

#159 2013-10-30 19:56:48

bobbym
Administrator

Online

Re: Correspondence Chess

Of course, as a 8 x 8 array.


In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it.
All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof.
 

#160 2013-10-31 00:11:26

Agnishom
Real Member
Award: Wink Sherlock

Online

Re: Correspondence Chess

Then why are you using the board and pieces?


'And fun? If maths is fun, then getting a tooth extraction is fun. A viral infection is fun. Rabies shots are fun.'
'God exists because Mathematics is consistent, and the devil exists because we cannot prove it'
'Who are you to judge everything?' -Alokananda
 

#161 2013-10-31 00:17:01

bobbym
Administrator

Online

Re: Correspondence Chess

Because I do not have an 8 x 8 array.


In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it.
All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof.
 

#162 2013-10-31 01:51:40

Agnishom
Real Member
Award: Wink Sherlock

Online

Re: Correspondence Chess

Do you have a board?


'And fun? If maths is fun, then getting a tooth extraction is fun. A viral infection is fun. Rabies shots are fun.'
'God exists because Mathematics is consistent, and the devil exists because we cannot prove it'
'Who are you to judge everything?' -Alokananda
 

#163 2013-10-31 02:03:06

bobbym
Administrator

Online

Re: Correspondence Chess

Yes, I have one wood board. Got it when I was very young.

I use online boards when I am on the internet.

Grandpappyd made a beautiful board that he lost.


In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it.
All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof.
 

#164 2013-10-31 02:08:59

anonimnystefy
Real Member

Offline

Re: Correspondence Chess

bobbym wrote:

Yes, I have one wood board. Got it when I was very young. Grandpappyd made a beautiful board that he lost.

That would be your maternal granpa, right?

5. Bg2


The limit operator is just an excuse for doing something you know you can't.
“It's the subject that nobody knows anything about that we can all talk about!” ― Richard Feynman
“Taking a new step, uttering a new word, is what people fear most.” ― Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Crime and Punishment
 

#165 2013-10-31 02:16:46

bobbym
Administrator

Online

Re: Correspondence Chess

1. e4 c5
2. d3 d6
3. Nd2 g6
4. g3 Bg7
5 Bg2 Nc6

Yes, my mother's father.


In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it.
All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof.
 

#166 2013-10-31 02:22:28

anonimnystefy
Real Member

Offline

Re: Correspondence Chess

6. Nf3


The limit operator is just an excuse for doing something you know you can't.
“It's the subject that nobody knows anything about that we can all talk about!” ― Richard Feynman
“Taking a new step, uttering a new word, is what people fear most.” ― Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Crime and Punishment
 

#167 2013-10-31 02:24:47

bobbym
Administrator

Online

Re: Correspondence Chess

1. e4 c5
2. d3 d6
3. Nd2 g6
4. g3 Bg7
5 Bg2 Nc6
6 Nf3 Bg4


In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it.
All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof.
 

#168 2013-11-21 13:54:45

anonimnystefy
Real Member

Offline

Re: Correspondence Chess

7. o-o

Last edited by anonimnystefy (2013-11-21 13:55:07)


The limit operator is just an excuse for doing something you know you can't.
“It's the subject that nobody knows anything about that we can all talk about!” ― Richard Feynman
“Taking a new step, uttering a new word, is what people fear most.” ― Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Crime and Punishment
 

#169 2013-11-21 14:27:24

bobbym
Administrator

Online

Re: Correspondence Chess

1. e4 c5
2. d3 d6
3. Nd2 g6
4. g3 Bg7
5 Bg2 Nc6
6 Nf3 Bg4
7 0-0 Nf6


In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it.
All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof.
 

#170 2013-11-21 19:38:03

phrontister
Real Member

Online

Re: Correspondence Chess

Hi,

I think "6 Nf3" should read "6 Ngf3" (deduced from 7 0-0) to show which knight is referred to, as both knights can reach f3.


"The good news about computers is that they do what you tell them to do. The bad news is that they do what you tell them to do." - Ted Nelson
 

#171 2013-11-21 20:38:49

bobbym
Administrator

Online

Re: Correspondence Chess

That is correct.


In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it.
All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof.
 

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB